Podcast
Features
Comments
About Invisible Ink
I get asked this a lot: “So, is Invisible Ink about zines, or is it a zine?” The answer is more of the latter. It’s essentially a one-person operation, and it has a very handcrafted feel to me. The majority of the contributors are my indie press heroes, but a good story, is a good story, so “professional” writers and regular people do show up and tell a story or two. I like mixing all those folks up together, and I love it that radio strips away all those visual cues that prejudice us about someone’s writing. On the radio you can’t tell the quality of the paper, or if the work is bound or stapled, or if it was printed professionally or made at the Kinkos around the corner.
Zines and public radio are a natural fit. Zines are publications done for the love of doing them, not to make a profit. Most people involved lose money, and volunteer their time. A good zine and a successful radio story share the same feeling of connection between the author and the audience. I like to think of the show’s sound as being zine-like in structure. Sometimes it’s straightforward, and sometimes it jumps around with scattered bits of interview strung throughout the half hour, punctuated by shorter stories within. Then sometimes you turn the page and there’s a taped down Xeroxed picture of Mr. T for no real reason.
After about a year of doing Invisible Ink by myself, I began to get more actual paying work in radio. In early 2004, I was working on five different radio shows a week and it was getting harder and harder to get Invisible Ink done each Sunday. That’s when Sue
Mell and Matt
Simon came in. They came to the station ostensibly as interns, but proved themselves to be great producers right out of the gate. I hope to broadcast more of their inspiring work in the future. I still don’t have regular producers as such, no meetings, no assignments, but maybe that’ll change.
About “The Anti-Gambler” (Invisible Ink #57- 04/25/04)
So I’ve gotten pretty fed up with all the glorified Vegas crap. The lottery is a regressive tax on people with no hope. The predatory gambling practices of the Vegas casinos are despicable. And, I like poker too, but what’s with all the poker nights all the sudden? It’s not like cards were just invented! This is not about puritanism, I just think this hipster “risk it all” gambling phenomena is silly. Going to a casino is about as cool as going to McDonalds. This week we have stories about gambling, and there are none of those happy, quirky, British guy walks into a casino and bets his life savings on a roulette wheel and wins stories. These are only the horror stories of gambling: suicide, addiction, the lottery, and annoying poker night players. Joshuah Bearman (Other People’s Stories, The Believer, McSweeneys), John Marr (Murder Can Be Fun), Kim Phillips-Fein (The Baffler), and Dr. James Westphal (UCSF gambling addiction expert) contribute. The hipster gambling backlash has begun. Those guys in Swingers were dorks. That was the point.
About “For Love” (Invisible Ink #50- 02/15/04)
The things we do for love. As a cure for our post-Valentine’s Day emotional hangover, we have these stories about the extremes people go to in the name of love. It’s not pretty. Sue Mell, you will soon hear, has done some extreme things in the name of love and after being told an equally distressing story about the ends her friend goes to just to please her boyfriend, she went on a mission collecting stories. What we discovered is that these stories could also be described as the things we do when we fail to realize that we aren’t in love. We here at Invisible Ink want you all to know that we are decidedly pro-love, even though it rarely sounds like it.
Sue Mell on “For Love”
For me, “For Love” was a perfect world kind of situation. I got to incorporate my skills as a performer, a writer, and a producer, as well as just myself at the end. I’d had that spermicide story kicking around in my head literally for years and kept looking for some way to write it or use it for something. It was the seed that all the rest of the parts germinated from and I feel incredibly lucky that that seed got rooted in the soil of Invisible Ink. I’m not sure what I said in my initial meeting with Roman that convinced him I had a show’s worth of idea, but he encouraged me to gather more tape and get something together in time for Valentine’s Day and the result turned out to be a show I find deeply satisfying and much more complex than what I started with.
 |
About Roman Mars
I was working on my PhD in plant genetics before I became obsessed with making radio. I then took what turned out to be an indefinite hiatus from academia so I could move to San Francisco and join the workforce. I spent a couple of years saving up my money so I could make the transition to the high paying, go-go world of public radio. I called it “life investment.” Rather than buying anything, I lived meagerly and financed a couple of lean years of unpaid and/or underpaid work in radio. I applied for all kinds of formal internships and didn’t get anywhere and then I finally wrote the KALW General Manger, Nicole Sawaya, directly and offered to do anything to get in the door. Writing that email was one of the best things I’ve ever done. It should be noted that before I started knocking on doors, I spent a great deal of time learning everything I could on my own so I would be an asset to the station/program that finally decided to take me in. That’s where Transom proved itself to be an invaluable resource.
Three years later, I’ve produced dozens of shows for KALW and I’ve helped launch three new radio programs. I currently work on Invisible Ink, Writers’ Voice Radio, Philosophy
Talk, and I’m a KALW announcer and board operator. I work about 60-70 hours a week and it does get to be too much at times. When I consider dropping something, the obvious choice is to drop Invisible Ink because it’s the one that takes up the most time and doesn’t bring in any income, but I can’t do it. Invisible Ink is why I do radio. Until I find something as fulfilling, I’ll be staying up editing until 3 in the morning for a while.
About Sue Mell
Sue Mell got her start right here at Transom this past December with “Girl Detectives“. She lives in San Francisco where she works as a photo stylist and an illustrator and is a frequent contributor to Invisible Ink.
Sometimes radio sticks with you and you don’t know quite why. That was the case for us with Invisible Ink, a Radio Zine produced by Roman Mars for San Francisco’s KALW, and so we’re featuring a couple of shows from that series which stuck with us–one on gambling, one on love. They are made with Roman’s compadres Sue Mell and Matt Simon. The stories are simple enough, but there are little velcro-like bits in them that hold you. See if you feel the same. Talk about those hooks, and also talk to Roman & Co. about what it takes to start up your own little radio show and make it grow.
I think that ‘zines — like blogs, rock musicals and blue tuxedos — are a terrible idea but for the odd case in which they are done very, very well.
Invisible Ink being of course the odd case. It’s a fantastic idea, executed beautifully. And I love the analogy of a ‘zine. I’m writing the PRX feature for Invisible Ink right now, and as I cut down what you wrote in Transom I noticed the following sentence:
Part of what I like about Invisible Ink is the quality of the sound; I can tell from the sound that it was, by analogy, made at the Kinkos around the corner. I think this is a good thing; it does not sound like what I’m used to having radio sound like, and I am more willing to listen, at least for a bit, and see what kind of storytelling is about to happen.
I think the appeal of good ‘zines (and blogs) is their very lack of "professional" production values; there’s something appealing about a single person who truly believes in what he or she is doing. It’s the sound of Invisible Ink, I think, that gives it its credibility. Or at least makes me willing to listen.
So, I guess, to my question: aren’t there just as many cues on the radio that indicate how and where a piece was produced? I’m relatively new to radio, so I’m honestly curious about what these might be; the only piece I ever produced was recorded on a little consumer digital recording device, and I have been told that the quality of the actualities both adds to and detracts from the impact of the piece.
Wanted to open another discussion: another self-produced show, B-Side Radio, showed up on the Public Radio Exchange this month. A PRX presence is a necessary but not sufficient condition for national distribution, so my question — to any program directors reading this — is:
Once a producer has posted a season of half-hour shows to PRX, what’s the next step? Where and how does the show market itself to get PDs to make that crucial choice to free up a half-hour of programming on Sunday afternoon?
Thanks for the props, Brendan.
There are many opinions about "sound quality" out there. These two episodes certainly have interviews recorded in non-ideal conditions. There are several phoners, there are clips of three people sitting around a table (with varying degrees of being on and off mic), there’s a story read into a Marantz cassette recorder set up in the subject’s living room. I tend to like that kind of variation. (I also have to work with what I’ve got.) I know producers who will never do a phoner, but I think the sound of someone’s voice over the phone is incredibly comforting and familiar. I dig that on the radio. Joe Frank and Benjamen Walker use it to great effect.
Not all Invisible Ink episodes sound like these. The collection that’s up on PRX range from those done exclusively in the studio to recordings of performances in front of a live audience. I think it’s interesting that Transom picked these two shows, because they do have their technical shortcomings. I think if the story and construction is good it can transcend those limitations, if they are indeed perceived as limitations. I personally like the collage-like sound. It makes me happy.
I would probably like your piece done on a digital recorder, or at least I don’t think the recording would necessarily detract from the overall success of the piece. It all depends.
I can’t get over how great the gambling episode is. I have made many people listen to it (and I dare you to click it on right now oh ye uninitiated listener) and they all have the same reaction.. no one wants to turn it off! You have a unique way of pushing the story forward.
As for phoners, people are just more comfortable talking on the phone – its that simple. And with the q10 telephone template in the waves plug ins – they really can sound great.
keep up the good work
Thanks Benjamen! That’s great that you’ve gotten a good reaction from playing "The Anti-Gambler" for people.
I’ve done very little exploration with plugins. I use compression and limiters on most voices, but I’ve never gotten into the expensive sets. Are the Waves Q10 the ones to try out? What do they do to the telephone sound to make it better?
I have to agree that primary reason the phone is great is because people are so comfortable talking into one. Mics have a way of freezing people up. I’ve even considered having a telephone handset as a prop so that when I have less experienced readers in the studio they will feel more relaxed when they’re telling their story. I still might try it.
Hi Roman.
Hope things are treating you well.
Emily and I checked out quite a few of your shows after meeting you this summer.
One of my favorites is show #38, "Note to Six Grade Self" from Julie Orringer’s book of essays How to Breath Underwater.
After being floored by the piece I immediately went out and bought the book. I liked the essay in written form, but felt it had less of an impact than her reading of the essay.
I love it that radio strips away all those visual cues that prejudice us about someone’s writing.
Can you elaborate a bit? What do you think specifically think makes radio sometimes more powerful than print?
- Aaron
Hey Aaron! Thanks for posting.
I like spoken word an awful lot, but I don’t know if it’s necessarily more powerful than print. I’m really honored that you liked the Invisible Ink version of the story more than the piece in the book. I loved the story so much that I was simply hoping for being in the same league. The final version of this episode is one of the ones available on PRX, BTW. It just got a really kind review from a Transomite. (Yeah! Sydney rules!)
With "Note to Sixth-Grade Self" in particular, Julie’s voice and reading was great and the style of language, with its short, list-like cadence made it a natural for being performed. That’s why I picked it out from the book originally. When I read it, I heard it aloud in my head. I am also proud of how the music came together in that one. I don’t know if it made it more powerful, but I liked the result.
In reference to the whole issue of "visual prejudices" I should mention another episode I did once called "Confessions of a Child Beauty Queen." I’ve always considered "Notes" and "Confessions" as a matched set. "Notes" was published by Random House and written by a Stegner fellow and writing teacher at Stanford who had a write up in People Magazine last year. "Confessions", on the other hand, was written by a woman who works at a telephone company and only after being encouraged by her good friend who was into zines did she finally produce 50 copies and place it in two stores in San Francisco. The resulting physical product couldn’t have been more different, but the audio version erases almost all of that disparity. I love that.
The show didn’t set out to be some kind of champion for the indie press. I just wanted to put work on the radio that I liked. But, putting everyone on a level playing field through the use of radio has been an exciting side effect. In an earlier post, Brendan wrote (although I don’t know if he meant it exactly) that he thought zines were a terrible idea, except when they were done well. Can you imagine someone saying that about books? I can’t, even though it’s probably equally applicable.
Blogs, on the other hand, are universally God-awful. (Just kidding)
hiya roman…
as you know i’m a big fan of the invisible ink. from the first show i heard, i’ve wondered about the effect you’ve had on the writers you’ve worked with.
do they recognize the other dimensions that audio brings to their words? has anyone wanted to continue working with you on bringing other texts to the radio? do you think they consider their work from an audio standpoint, as well as how it reads on the page, after being on invisible ink?
then there’s the other side of the coin…
has anyone been uncomfortable or disdainful of the process/final project? anyone horribly difficult to work with, considering the medium crossover?
also, how do you know, when you come across a piece of writing, that it’s IIR fodder? is the recognition instantaneous?
ok, i think _maybe_ that’s enough questions for one post.
julie
Hey Julie!
You’ve got questions:
-do they recognize the other dimensions that audio brings to their words?
I think they get it, but I’m not sure. In fact, I’m not always sure I get it. I’ll read a piece and it’ll stick in my head but the way it comes out as an audio piece is often completely different than I expect.
-has anyone wanted to continue working with you on bringing other texts to the radio?
Oh yes. Most contributors become regulars.
-do you think they consider their work from an audio standpoint, as well as how it reads on the page, after being on invisible ink?
I don’t think it effects their later written work that much at all, but I think they get good at recognizing what will work for the show and what won’t. But again, I’m not sure. Man, these questions are hard.
-then there’s the other side of the coin…
has anyone been uncomfortable or disdainful of the process/final project? anyone horribly difficult to work with, considering the medium crossover?
I’ve had one person who really didn’t like the final product (and I have paranoid fears about a couple others, but I’ve never heard anything concrete). In his case I simply heard more layers in the story than he did. His version was strictly sad and emotional. With the music and intro, I made the audio version also very angry and darkly humorous. He didn’t like that at all. I redid the piece with him sitting next to me and rebroadcast the story months later. I must admit I liked the new version better. (I still think the original one has merit, though.)
In another case I used music in a piece where the author actually knew the band personally, and didn’t like them. She wasn’t too happy about that, but she didn’t complain really.
Zinesters aren’t used to editors, so it can be hard for them at first to accept revisions to their work. I’ve found that mainstream authors are actually the most hands off. That really makes sense once you think about it, but I was surprised by that at first. Professional authors have to deal with book companies, editors, publicists, book jacket designers, etc. They are more inclined to record a piece and say something like, "I can’t wait to hear what you do with it." Zinesters are more likely to want to hear the piece before it airs. I never have time for that step anymore, so I stopped offering a long time ago.
-also, how do you know, when you come across a piece of writing, that it’s IIR fodder? is the recognition instantaneous?
In some cases I know right away: "Confessions", "Notes", "Other People’s Stories", the stuff by Al Burian. Conversely, the "Lotteryville USA" essay from the Baffler that I used in "The Anti-Gambler" was a complete surprise. First off, the essay is dense and about 20 pages long and even though it’s one of the most memorable things I’ve ever read, I never considered it as Invisible Ink fodder until the gambling show began to develop. Even then, I wasn’t sure it would work until I edited, recorded and scored it. Now it’s one of my favorite moments from any show. I can’t exactly tell you why.
Damn good questions, friend. I hope I provided some reasonably coherent answers.
I freely admit that when i read the description of this show, my first thought was, "this will never work." i imagined a zine transcribed for radio… jagged, disparate ideas photocopied and taped together… but i couldn’t have been more wrong!
the gambling show is great. i like the host’s pacing and delivery. the music adds to the stories without taking over, a nice non-overbearing touch. my only complaint: couldn’t you have managed to talk to dr. james via tape sync? the phone tape really drags on the quality.
but in all, everyone talks about how public radio needs something ‘different’ (‘pop vultures’ being an example of a recent success). invisible end is also busting out of the jello mold.
Rene: I appreciate you giving the program a shot, even though the description gave you pause. If only all radio listeners were like you! Supercool.
It’d have been nice to do get higher quality tape with Dr. James, but this is a case where I had to work with what I had. Invisible Ink is a weekly program that runs on absolutely no budget. I say this with no hyperbole. I don’t get paid, contributors don’t get paid, remote studios don’t get booked; it’s truly a labor of love. Or, just a labor sometimes. Anyway, until there’s a worldwide network of unpaid/underpaid independent producers who trade on doing tape sync double enders and other such duties that we can’t afford to do on our own, then I’ll have to stick with the phone.
(Memo to self: Create worldwide network of unpaid/underpaid independent producers who trade on doing tape sync double enders and other such duties that we can’t afford to do on our own.)
There were other factors in this specific case leading to the need for a phoner: Doctors are busy and the show has to get done by 2pm Sunday no matter what. But, it all managed to come together pretty nicely, so I can’t complain. He was also a pleasure to talk to! We talked for about an hour. Just a fascinating guy.
Thanks for the kind words.
roman,
you make it so easy to be a fan of yours and the work you are doing.
I wonder if you can speak to a curiosity of mine. IIR has been a San Francisco native since its beginning, and I wonder how much of the overall content and tone comes from being in San Francisco, and how it would be effected by immersing in or focusing on other regions, city cultures, and possibly even the effect of a different local listener.
Also, as a girl who loves raw sound, some of my favorite moments are the phone conversations. They give me a sense of time that recorded readings somehow lose.
props to you,
sofia
First off: The name of the show is perfect: it describes what you do and it’s clever, but not arrogant–just like the program
I love Roman’s voice and delivery: he’s like Joe Frank crossed with Ira Glass crossed with George W. Bush (sorry Roman!). W. not because of use of language/malapropisms, but rather sometimes Roman hits ev-er-y sin-gle word HARD. He can range from relaxed to really pissed off.
I think Roman’s use of music is masterful. This guy just has a great, great ear.
I love it that you use phone tape. I think so many people in this insulated little world are snobbish about that and it’s a shame. Sometimes the phone is so intimate and raw and most of the time I think it really works.
In the anti-gambling show, you have to listen to the whole edition. The poker night story pay off is so unexpected and uproariously funny. I’m still laughing. And I think the radio version of that story adds so much to it. It’s a perfect example of how IIR enhances and improves print. The music in the background is wonderful. Now I know why I love that song so much!!!
So, you may have gotten the impression that I’m a fan–I confess.
What I love about Roman and IIR is that you’ve clearly listened to/studied a lot of pub radio and incorporated all of the great things of past geniuses, yet you sound authentic and fresh.
I have heard not-so-great editions of IIR and this makes me happy. Even Roman has had a learning curve.
This show could easily be national, but I do love it that it is grounded in a specific place.
I both love it and hate it that you do this show without any money. I love it cuz it’s inspiring and exactly how local public radio stations should work–give a new guy with a great idea and lots of talent a place to incubate.
I hate it (and we’re heading into a rant here) because IIR is something public radio (CPB) should find a way to support. But, I would gamble that it won’t. The elite cadre of pub radio heads that run the system would say things like "we don’t fund local ventures" and "but KALW has no track record of launching national shows" and "why hasn’t he spent thousands of dollars to provide us with a marketing study to assess the viability of this show", etc etc.
This is a guy who has a rare GENIUS for this medium and someone should throw a little bit of money at him.
Hi Sofia. You’re making it easy to be a fan of yours, as well.
The show definitely reflects the community that it’s in. In fact, it being local is sometimes about the only connective tissue that links all the disparate elements. I wonder what the show would become if it were heard nationally. (I don’t think it’s very likely, but I do wonder/dream.) It’s not evident in the programs on Transom, or even the ones I placed on PRX, because I stripped out a lot of the regional references. It wasn’t until I embarked on this project for Transom/PRX that I realized how often I make offhand comments about the local alternative weekly or some street in the Mission. The tag line is "stories and commentary from the local, independent and underground press." What will "local" mean when it’s played in Boston on a weekly basis? I don’t know. Maybe I’ll have to buckle down and stick firmly to the "independent" part of the formula. But, the thought of missing out on featuring local people like Julie Orringer and Mary Roach because they are with a major press depresses me. Being local may be constrictive to some people, but for me it’s liberating.
I do like the idea of focusing on small presses and scenes in several different communities. I could have a travel budget and everything!
Holly! Too kind.
That is definitely my first George W. Bush comparison, although I’ve always thought we shared a sort of roguish charm. I’m pleased you like the music, it’s my favorite part of the process (save meeting all the cool people). I really love the background music behind the Josh Bearman’s story, as well. I loved it so much the first time I heard it used on Benjamen Walker’s Your Radio Nightlight that I stole it immediately! That’s all part if the whole "incorporat(ing) all of the great things of past geniuses." I’m a big believer in that.
Yep. There’s not a lot of hope for small shows, is there? I must confess I’ve never even tried to get funding for the show. I was too busy just making the show. I’ve never even sent out a single episode to other stations or distributors. I definitely think people would like it if they heard it and that’d be nice someday, but putting it on every station was never a priority. It would be damn nice to get paid for it and it’s been great hearing the reaction from other people around the country. So, I may be more motivated to that end someday. It’s so hard to find the time. Hey…maybe I need to quit one of my other jobs. Listen to Holly: throw money at me!
The trend is definitely working against small stations and local content. I don’t know what the answer is. When the current system collapses because NPR, PRI, and APM sell their wares again and again and again, to satellite and WiFi and whatever else comes next, then the stations will need local producers providing unique content so that they may distinguish themselves. Luckily there are stations around today, like lovely KALW, that feel like we are necessary now.
Hi Roman and Sue,
I really enjoyed the Love segments, I am interested to know how much editing went into the monologues of your contributors. It’s rare that people can tell a personal story so fluidly without a script, how did these recordings take shape? Were they rehearsed at all? It just sounds like I’m eavestropping–which I love.
Thanks for writing, Michelle. I’m going to field this one while Sue Mell tries to make the most of her week away from all things stressful.
First off, the monologues originally existed as interviews done by Sue. She was very good at guiding them through the whole story, moving them along and giving them things to reflect upon. This was essential. When I was doing the final editing I never felt like I was missing some critical piece, or like there was some crucial question that Sue forgot to ask. That made the other parts easy.
We lucked out in that the storytellers were kind of naturals. They weren’t scripted or coached, although I did have Sue redo Laura’s spermicide story interview on the hybrid in the studio. It was first done on the Marantz phone jack input and the levels were all, well, Marantz-y. I was in the booth on the second go round and all we did was try to get Laura to say things again the same way, and if she left out a cool detail that Sue and I remembered from the original tape, Sue asked her more questions to get that part of the story out of her again.
The story about Matt is so marvelous because it’s the sort of story that could pass by without someone noticing what was happening to them. In a sense nothing actually happens; it was only a story because it was so infused with meaning. The interviewee was a brilliantly observant guy that had really thought about what he’d done. Sue set up the perfect environment for him to just go off and do his thing. The tape was amazing to listen to. That moment when he breaks down floors me every time I hear it. I’ll never forget Sue calling me up as soon as the interview ended. She knew what she had right away.
There was a fair amount of editing to get everything in the right order and to cut out some extraneous details: typical editing stuff. Sue did the first pass and got each piece down to 13-15 minutes each and I streamlined them down a few more minutes and rearranged a bit from there. It helps to have two people going over something like this. It’s easier to kill someone else’s darlings than your own.
The "round table" interstitials were from a 90 minute source tape and Sue pulled all the relevant parts. I simply cleaned them up and mixed/arranged them within the show.
The horrifying and just plain wrong puppy story was gathered by another natural story collector, Matt Simon, for a different Ink episode called Other People’s Stories (one of my favorites, go to PRX to listen). He did the editing, pulling together parts from three different retellings of the same story. It was cut from that OPS show because it was just too brutal for that specific program. When Sue came to me with the "For Love" idea, I thought it would fit the twisted nature of the resulting mix.
Maybe Sue can chime in when she’s up and about, if there’s something I forgot or got completely wrong. Both are strong possibilities.
Hi Roman,
"Invisible Ink" is the greatest name for a radio show.
I’ve really enjoyed these shows–I’ve also listened to some of your work on PRX. I particularly like "Notes to 6th Grade Self" and "Confessions of a Child Beauty Queen." When you read Oringer’s work you said that you heard it aloud. Have there been other times when this has happened and it hasn’t translated into radio the way you had imagined? If so, why? Conversely, have you ever done something that surprised you because it turned out so well on the radio? Have you ever heard something on the radio and marveled at how perfectly it was done? What pieces/producers have inspired you?
This show sounds like one that should have been made ten years ago, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. There’s tons of great writing that sits around unread because of distribution issues or people being turned off by low budget layout. What a shame! Thanks for putting it on air. I admire your show also because you’re not afraid to use a dense essay like the gambling show opener on air. Too much of the time I think public radio dumbs things down supposedly for clarity. I disagree with other posters here that your audio sounds like crap. I think nothing would have been added to its appeal by it sounding pristine. I thought the production value gave it personality without being so lo-fi that it sounded unintelligible or crackly. While I’m not opposed to crystal clear audio in theory, I wonder if a zineish radio show has a certain charm that might be belied by a Marketplace-esque sound. I need to go listen to your other shows now…
Howdy Chelsea,
I’m glad you like the name. People seem to dig “Invisible Ink”, though even the most ardent of friends and fans seem to insist that it’s “Invisible Ink Radio.” Damn you, limited domain name and email address availability!
Alas, I cannot take credit for the name. My lovely wife Mae, the public radio widow, came up with it. Runners up: “Cut and Paste” (too crafty), “Founder Effect” (too obtuse), “Smart Went Crazy” (too stolen), “Funemployed” (too painfully accurate), and “Random At Best” (too close to being the actual name).
One of the hard parts about doing a weekly show with so few resources is that, like the Red Queen, you’re always running to keep up. This means that I don’t have the luxury of working on a piece and having the option to scrap it if it doesn’t turn out as good as I’d hoped. If I get started I generally have to finish, and it has to make it on the air. So there definitely have been pieces that didn’t quite work as well as I’d originally envisioned.
I’m having a hard time thinking of specifics. The most common thing I get wrong when I read something is my estimate of time. I’m putting off producing a couple of pieces I really liked when I recorded them because they are just unbelievably long and I don’t know where to begin editing them down. This was a strange case with a touring author, and I didn’t spend any time with the piece on paper before I recorded the reading. It’s still good, but things just don’t move along fast enough and it’ll be tricky trimming down with the text as is. I’ll have to see. I did this once before with “Note to Sixth-Grade Self” and that one still made sense even after I cut out 10 minutes of material. So there’s certainly hope.
Here’s something else: I always interview everyone who does something for me. I talk with them about the piece and about their life in general. This allows me to use that tape instead, in case I misread the piece and the formal reading turns out to be less conversational in tone than I imagined. I’ve used this alternate tape a couple of times. It’s also nice just to talk to people about themselves. For someone who doesn’t talk all that much in normal life, I’ve really taken to interviewing people.
As for things I didn’t think would work until I tried it, I’d have to go with again with the “Lotteryville USA” essay featured at the top of “The Anti-Gambler.” It was a long piece, it was ten years out of date (I had to redo the numbers and localize it to California), it was technical, and it wasn’t really a story, but I liked the way it turned out. I was also a little surprised by “Confessions.” I knew it would work as written, but I just wasn’t sure I could handle such intense material. That was my first foray into that sort of thing. Before that I tended to specialize in stories about ironic death and drug use.
Tons of people inspire me. Since this post is getting long, I’ll start to narrow down the field and save those for later, and I’ll also a respond to CW. There’s editing to do! Thanks for all the questions. You guys rule.
I’ve been mulling over this subject of people/pieces that inspire me for a day (as well as recording four interviews, one panel discussion and editing two hour long programs for Sunday) and it’s tough to narrow it all down.
First, I’ll start close and widen the field. When Matt Simon came on as an intern I was floored by the way he made “sound art” out of everything he did. One of my favorite pieces of his that I had on Invisible Ink was a musico-documentary about the alternative knitting scene in the Bay Area. It’s called “Beyond Scarves” and he co-produced it with Ken Reisman and it’s featured in a program I did called “In Defense of Crafts.” Stated simply, I could never have done that piece. I just was happy to be the guy who got to broadcast it (first). Sue Mell’s most enviable quality is her great skill as a writer, even though I nixed her written outro in the “For Love” show (which is why we ended with that interview). She totally raised my game. Having those two people with such talent ostensibly “under” me inspires me more than anything.
There is this comic book villain from the Captain America books called the Taskmaster. The Taskmaster’s power was that he has “photographic reflexes”, meaning he could imitate any fighting style perfectly and use it against his opponent. Well, I have a kind of crappy version of this. When I used to go out dancing in a club (it doesn’t happen much these days, but once upon a time…) I would spy someone doing some move and, lo and behold, before I new it I was imitating it subconsciously. I couldn’t help it. Well, this happens with me with radio as well. After someone played me a great piece by Matt Power about folding origami that used really cool voice manipulation to perfectly demonstrate that the guy talking was actually talking about nothing, I began using all these crazy voice filters in pieces. I never intended to cop his style, it just happened. Sometimes it worked, sometimes not, but I have to admit, it never was as cool as what he did. Ultimately everyone inspires me; everything affects me. I just hope I can do their inspiration some justice.
When I think of people whose work I enjoy the most, I think the thing that stands out most prominently is their writing. My friend Benjamen Walker writes some monologues that are so unbelievably good I just want to punch him in the mouth. Jonathan Goldstein also leaves me with the same feeling, but it’s less acute, because I’ve never met the man. If we do come face to face someday, he would be wise to duck. Going through the Joe Frank archives (when they used to be all online) has an uncanny ability to simultaneously make you want to do radio right away because it’s so freaking great, and never do radio again because you could never do it as good as he does. There are dozens of others. If it weren’t for Ray Suarez and Ira Glass, I wouldn’t be here at all. So, blame them.
More later.
Hi CW! I’m glad you like the show. It does seem like this radio show could’ve existed a while ago, especially during what is often called the “zine revolution” of the late eighties and early nineties. But today, there are still great zine communities (most notably Portland, OR) and the internet has made so many self publishers that it’s hard to keep up. Even NPR’s Jeffrey Dvorkin commented on blogs this week. Three years late, sure, but at least they’re trying to stay on top of things.
I never feel a need to talk down to the audience, hence the lottery essay. With any luck my elocution (forever pilloried by that George W. Bush comment), editing and music choice makes it go down easier. But, my starting point is that the folks in listenerland are always ready and willing to become active listeners. I also kind of design the shows as mix tapes; collections of songs that are somewhat enjoyable even if the words aren’t being absorbed.
I’m with you. I like the different types of audio tape. Noisy, scratchy, tinny, I dig it all as long as meaning is conveyed. I don’t think the other posters were being quite as harsh as your characterization of them, but alas, it’s not for everyone. I do wonder, if given unlimited resources, would I actively choose the phoners and analog devices? I’m not sure, and I don’t think I’ll have a chance to find out. I am fairly certain I’ll ever sound like Marketplace.
Speaking of, Marketplace is a great show. I’m continually impressed by how they make a compelling half hour about a subject I do not give a rat’s ass about. That is straight up skill.
Thanks for listening and thanks for writing! Let me know what you think of the other shows.
I want to turn this around a bit. I’ve got some questions:
-What’s your “perfect piece” Chelsea?
-Have you ever needed to coach your subjects Michelle? (I certainly have in other instances, but “for love” was free of that.)
-People have commented about liking “The Anti-Gambler”, but does anyone think having a 30-minute opinion piece is problematic? I have no desire for Invisible Ink to be “journalism”, in fact I encourage lying in service to a story, but does the public radio venue presume a certain amount of truthfulness and balance?
Just wondering.
Another fan of IIR here (soon you won’t be able to keep track of us all Roman), and I wanted to share an interesting response I have when listening to the shows. Time is suspended. Or so it seems. After each listen, I am constantly amazed that only 30 minutes has gone by. Perhaps this has something to do with the intimacy of the program, which creates a listening environment where I naturally concentrate on each and every minute, all distractions and details of the day left behind.
I think the programs also feel longer because of the thematic-format that weaves a common thread through the show without focusing too specifically on one area. The balance of format and tone, coupled with varying perspectives on each theme, makes it feel like I’ve traveled some distance since sitting down at my computer and downloading the show. Each segment feels really full and by the end of those 6 or 7 minutes, the people or characters seem comfortable and familiar.
And, after listening I’m always really happy and satisfied — even when the shows are more on the somber side. Part of this comes from being exposed to things — ideas, emotions, voices — that are new and surprising. But I think it also has to do with sensing Roman’s passion for people’s words (whether spoken or on the page) and his strong curiosity about life that creates such interesting and stimulating shows.
The truthfulness and balance in public radio question is interesting. Neck-deep in news for more hours in a day than is probably healthy, I really enjoy the alternative presentation of political, social, and cultural ideas that IIR provides. Like This American Life, the human element or voice in IIR, filled with opinion, subjectivity, and perhaps at times manipulated, gives balance to the faceless facts and figures that fill a good portion of daily public radio news and public affairs.
Using the ever-popular Anti-Gambler show as an example, we get distinct, personal slices of how gambling affects different populations (rich, poor, hipster) mixed in with analysis about history, Hollywood, and addiction. The balance within the program is what I find extremely valuable in trying to understand how what appears in the daily news affects all sorts of individuals in different ways.
That said, I do think the public radio venue is seen as being trustworthy (that’s probably partially cultivated, partially an interpretation on behalf of listeners when it’s juxtaposed to other types of broadcast media). Roman, perhaps you could talk a little bit more about your feelings on lying and how it can add to storytelling, using some examples from previous shows.
Thanks! And do update us on the brief news you posted on your site about going national!
Catherine Komp
Have you ever needed to coach your subjects Michelle?
Hmm. I have in television, definitely, mainly because I worked a lot with kids, so I am curious about that element of "rehearsed spontaneity". I know in print q and a’s you can get people to sound smarter and funnier than they do in conversation with some good editing and re-arranging, and certainly in the radio I have worked on I have coached myself a bit, not quite scripted but not quite not, just to lose that flat feeling of reading. Generally though I have assumed that to get that feeling you just have to let someone talk long enough and then edit the story they are telling together. It just struck me in the "for love" piece that if there were edits they were so expert that I could not pick them out. It was like listening to a regular conversation, only better, which I suppose is how I would define good radio. I don’t know many people who can tell stories that well…I tried to figure out if knowing that the subject was reading, or "acting" would have subtracted from my investment in their story. I still don’t really know.
I read this story last week about Marlon Brando, that scene in "On the Waterfront" where he is talking to Eva Marie Saint. When she drops her glove he immediately bends to pick it up and begins stroking it and trying it on absently. I guess her dropping it was something that happened by accident in a rehearsal, and Marlon went with it. They decided to recreate that moment for the actual shoot and it does end up looking like an improv thing. So is that a "real" moment? I’m interested in that element of radio that is essentially acting, especially where a subject and/or monologue comes in. There have been moments, when I’m taping someone, that are so great, and then I realize there’s a technical problem or something–efforts to recreate them are always so pointless. Have you ever felt like coaching–because you said you have done it–compromises your subject or your piece? Or is good tape good tape?
Hi Catherine!
After each listen, I am constantly amazed that only 30 minutes has gone by.
I wonder if listening online contributes to this. I’m glad a 100 or so folks a day catch up with Invisible Ink online, but I’m not especially into listening to big chunks of audio while sitting in front of my computer. I guess it depends on what I’m doing, really. Several years ago, my former employer unknowingly paid me to listen to many, many hours of the TAL archives online. Those were the days.
Perhaps this has something to do with the intimacy of the program, which creates a listening environment where I naturally concentrate on each and every minute, all distractions and details of the day left behind.
That’s great. I’m really flattered that you give it such attention. I mentioned this earlier, but I really do think the goal of public radio in particular is to cultivate an engaged and active listener. This achieves multiple ends. You get to create programming that isn’t repetitive and lowest common denominator, and active listeners are active supporters; they give during the drives.
The human element or voice in IIR, filled with opinion, subjectivity, and perhaps at times manipulated, gives balance to the faceless facts and figures that fill a good portion of daily public radio news and public affairs.
I like this take on balance. I put on some anti-war piece a while ago and a more newsy radio person asked me why I didn’t put on an opposing view. I could’ve countered with the reasoned argument you’ve presented, but the truth was it never even occurred to me to broadcast a pro-war stance in my show.
Roman, perhaps you could talk a little bit more about your feelings on lying and how it can add to storytelling, using some examples from previous shows.
It’s not so much that lying adds to storytelling. It’s that I don’t actually care if it’s truth as long as it sounds real enough for the listener to get involved with and enjoy the story. I never present these as true stories, but the medium does seem to imply that, and I actually kind of enjoy the confusion that can create. This issue was discussed a lot in the “Darth Vader Impersonator” show right here on Transom: http://talk.transom.org/WebX?128@@.eeaf0c8
I even broadcast Sean and Ben’s story in an Invisible Ink episode (“Dream Job”) and all my friends thought it was real and I took great joy in that. I don’t know why, exactly. So in that case lying, or being fictional, did add to the story.
In “The Anti-Gambler” it wouldn’t matter to me if Josh Bearman made up the Journey guy (he didn’t). What we did do in that story was simplify it for the sake of telling it verbally. The written version was told through a couple of intermediaries and we simply eliminated them so it was less confusing. On the other hand, I didn’t and would never have knowingly presented facts in the “Lotteryville” essay that weren’t real. And, in case you are now left wondering, my Mom did win $5000 on a scratch off lottery ticket. I am curious: would it have bothered you if I made that up for effect?
One of my favorite moments in any Invisible Ink episode was part of an interview I did with Devin Friedman, the creator of Other People’s Stories. It’s the last bit in the show I did about OPS (II #44 on the invisibleinkradio.com website, and it’s also on PRX). We were talking about the veracity of the stories on his website and I told him my mantra: “I never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
Devin: “Hey, can I say that?”
Me: “Sure”
Devin: “A good friend of mine says ‘never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
Me: “There you go.”
In that little clip of an interview, we summed up the whole point of the “Other People’s Stories” episode. That’s good tape.
There are other cases of fictional storytelling. In the “Sports” show (#43) there’s a story about “Wee Jockey” that’s 90% made up. To be honest I never even asked if “Confessions of a Child Beauty Queen” was entirely real, even though I’m sure that’s often assumed by the listener.
And do update us on the brief news you posted on your site about going national!
Well, the show has been licensed weekly by WCAI and WNAN since they first appeared on the PRX. The whole PRX series was also licensed by WUAL, Alabama public radio. And, starting in two weeks new Invisible Ink episodes will be on every Sunday at 10:30pm on WZBC in Boston. So “national” is a bit of a misnomer, but it is Invisible Ink: Coast to coast, and I’m pretty excited about it.
Hi Michelle. Thanks for responding.
Hey, I can get used to being called an expert editor! I’m so glad you liked the result.
Since this came up, I’ve also been wondering if knowing something is made up would change my enjoyment of things. I remember first hearing Joe Frank’s pieces and not being aware of how it was scripted, and just being blown away by how raw it was. Then I learned the truth and I think I was impressed with him more than ever. But, I do think I listen to them differently knowing that they aren’t real.
So much of what we do is staged. Quite frankly it’s pretty hard to sound “natural” in a studio with a mic in your face. So, to get back to sounding like I’m just talking I script most everything, “uhs” included. I don’t think I’m in any way unique in this.
In the context of Invisible Ink I never feel weird about coaching subjects. It’s nice when I don’t have to, but if we’re not getting the result I need, I’m willing to do whatever it takes. During one interview I did with a very mic shy friend of mine I basically had to walk him through his own story, asking very specific questions (which I later cut out) and even suggesting ways to phrase his thoughts. It was his story. It was true, but he needed help. The final amount of raw tape was something like 90 minutes for a piece that ended up being 5 minutes in the show. That’s not an outlandish ratio for field tape, but considering I knew the beginning, middle and end before I even started, it sure felt like a lot.
I’ll bet that many of those moments where you tried to recreate something great you missed because of some technical difficulty were only failures in your mind. Not knowing what I had missed, I might think your retake was just brilliant. It’s funny getting a regular person to say the same thing again as if they never did it the first time. Often people can’t help saying something like “as I was saying earlier.” But, if you can get them over the taboo of “being fake” by telling their story like it’s a routine, then I’ve found I can often recapture some of the magic.
I guess it comes down to me being a “by any means necessary” sort of fellow. The real danger of extreme coaching is that you are likely to preclude those spontaneous moments when everything aligns and the tape is perfect, amazing, and completely unexpected. Those are the moments that make all the hours we put in worth it.
I liked the unvarnished, no-spin examination of people’s darker moments. I esp. liked the tale of the guy who tried to tear another guy down to win his love. This is the type of thing I’ve only heard told from the POV of the sought-after party before. I can’t say I’ve heard anyone admit (esp. in a radio story) that he/she was the persecutor/love extortionist half of this equation. Interesting. Looking forward to catching up on your other shows online
I’d never heard anything like it either, CW. When Sue played the interview for me, even before it was edited and reordered for maximum cohesion, I was totally in awe of the subject. You can tell he had really thought about and regretted what he had done.
I’m so glad you liked it. Thanks for posting (again!).
roman, bravo for putting together such a great show with so little time and money. it’s nice to have someone be my guide and wade through the ‘zine scene to find the interesting stuff.
do you ever wonder if the ‘zine focus limits you at all? i can hear the show growing away from an audio rendering of xeroxed pages to something with its own voice and vision and it’s definitely for the better.
and about the phone tape debate from way back…i’m all for something homemade, but i think the arguments for avoiding phone tape when you can aren’t about making something sound slick. it’s about making recordings that make an audience forget or not even consider the mechanics of radio production. making it so that a voice on the radio sounds so clear that the person is right there next to you on the couch as you listen and fold socks.
also. i just picked up this book yesterday.
http://www.akashicbooks.com/hairstyles.htm
think they’re invisible ink fans?
Thanks Jonathan!
For the most part, the zine moniker is only as limiting as I allow it. Save for the fact that I use the word “zine” in the intro (“Invisible Ink is your radio zine”) I don’t think the average listener knows or cares what the source material is (and if a few people are learning about the greatness of the indie press then that’s just a bonus). The “For Love” episode is very clearly an Invisible Ink episode in style and structure, but there isn’t a paper zine to be found. I don’t think anyone would even notice that the “Anti-Gambler” stories were all from the indie press if I didn’t mention it. I’ve always maintained that term “radio zine” referred to the show being my audio zine, and not so much a show about zines. Truthfully, when I started collecting stories for the pilots I was calling it “The Things Roman Likes Show.” It just so happened, because of the type of work I’m into, indie press and zine writers kept coming up. The useful part of the connotation is that unknown, self-published writers send me stuff without the fear that they are not popular enough to be taken seriously. The bad part is that I think the metaphor can color the way people hear the show. I don’t think anyone would necessarily talk about slick vs. homemade production if I didn’t invite the comparison with the show’s mantra. I could be wrong.
I violate the “zine as source material” thing so often that I feel funny even talking about it sometimes. The show also has a local focus, so when a book came into the station that I really loved, and it turned out to be by a local writer, I had her on the show. My interview with Mary Roach about her book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers was my first time talking to a major press author and I have no regrets at all. I was her first interview ever, the show was really good, the book became a bestseller, and she went on to be featured on about every NPR program. Ultimately my goal is to present new voices and interesting stories.
As for the phoner discussion, I agree with you that intimacy is a key goal. I guess I feel like someone’s voice over the phone is in some ways more intimate. They’re usually more relaxed and the tone just works. However, (and this is a big however) phoners are only good for capturing conversation. I never have anyone do a reading or anything formal over the phone. That sounds unnatural and doesn’t work for me. All this discussion tends to imply that there’s a vast amount sound design planning before I embark on an episode, and it’s not that there isn’t a fair amount of thought, but the prime directive is really just trying to get it all done and sounding good each week.
I’m glad you got Joe Meno’s book! I enjoyed it. He was in SF only for one night and I had another recording so we couldn’t get him in the studio. I’m going to be talking to my friends at Punk Planet about maybe working something out while I’m in Chicago during Third Coast. I know I have at least one fan in the Punk Planet crew, but she’s biased.
Who among you are going to Third Coast? I’m pretty excited about this year. Benjamen Walker and I are covering the festival for the Transom boards, so be sure to find me and say “Hello.”
Thanks for the questions, Jonathan.